Feathercrown

@Feathercrown@lemmy.world

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Is it safe to assume the guy i went out on a date with, just wants to sleep with me?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  (Don’t worry, they weren’t calling you that. It was a commentary on the dating scene.)

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Is it safe to assume the guy i went out on a date with, just wants to sleep with me?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  It’s because nobody on lemmy ever has sex

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  🤝

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  True, I guess immutable wasn’t the right term. It’s mutable, but it’s not really a choice.

  I do disagree that banning men is necessarily helpful for the discussion of women’s issues though. Yes, some women’s issues are so far removed from our experience that most male advice wouldn’t be helpful. But I believe there is always value to be found, even-- actually, especially-- from the outgroup. This is the exact rationale for DEI, or at least the one that I find reasonable, which is that having perspectives from people with a wider variety of experiences represented in a space can improve the discussions within it. When done correctly, this improves the experience of the people who the group is “for”. Mixing perspectives with outgroup members like this also improves the mutual understanding between the group’s members and nonmembers, which in this case especially is important. And it allows people to more easily become allies.

  What we don’t want is people with a hostile view of the group to be free to participate as much as they want. Maybe banning all men from the community is necessary, or maybe just efficient, to fulfill this purpose. In this case the ban might be worth it, but the loss of external perspectives is a downside and that should be considered here and always.

  Like another user replied, there’s a difference between “this isn’t for you” and “you aren’t allowed here”. There aren’t a lot of other public high-quality places to discuss women’s issues, so as a man your options are to:

  • Not discuss them, at most trying to understand by watching
  • Start your own community for men to discuss women’s issues, which without womens’ perspectives is not likely to go well
  • Start a community for all genders to discuss it – maybe I should do this one tbh, although maybe it might be smarter to expand the topic a little
• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Very well said

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  You know when conservatives ask why supposedly tolerant groups are actually very intolerant? This is that, but like actually legitimate. It baffles me that these groups can operate like this and not realize the harm they’re doing.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Your example doesn’t really match up because you only mentioned one group and the group shares no logical overlap with the called-out demographic.

  I interpreted the original statement as shorthand for white people discriminating against black people and men discriminating against women. Your reading is more grammatically accurate, but less charitable. Given your final paragraph I would encourage you to be more charitable with your interpretations.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  But you continue to reply, so you do have something to add

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Beautiful thank you

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Hey bigbananadealer how much is it for 1 big banana

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  It means that white men have discriminated against them, yes, but it doesn’t rule out the possibility that white women have discriminated against black groups or that black men have discriminated against women groups.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  This is like the least cis dude thing I can think of

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Have a good rest of your day!

  I would like to inform you than ending a comment like this to dismiss further discussion as often as you do is not the most healthy or useful practice.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  You added subtext, all they said was…

  Determining the meaning from things that aren’t directly stated is LITERALLY what subtext is

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Hello this is the TVA. Your opinion has been displaced from time and must be returned to 1942.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Imagine all the lemmings

  Commenting today, oo-ooh-ooh

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  I think if you look above your comment you will find his reasoning

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  We must treat all members of a majority group as oppressors. I am very intelligent.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  I don’t think you interpreted the meaning there correctly

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  They do explicitly allow agender individuals

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Glad to see ragebaiting is still alive and well

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  This comment perpetuates harmful gender stereotypes

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  No other publically visible community has posts that I find interesting but am not allowed to interact with.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  You’re literally just not used to being told it’s not your turn to speak. Get over it.

  Isn’t the goal to move past this behavior when based on immutable qualities rather than merit? The ethical value of a reverse country club model is pretty controversial.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨ultra high iq⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Real biting retort. I’m taking notes as we speak.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨ultra high iq⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Thank you for your expertise, @WorldsDumbestMan

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨ultra high iq⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  IQ is a rough measure of short and long term memory, pattern recognition, and reasoning ability. Naturally as a single number its predictive power is limited in the face of the broad range of human abilities, but given a high enough sample size it clearly correlates with several meaningful things.

  Even accepting only the most clear correlation-- that performance on an IQ test predicts performance on future IQ tests-- to claim that this correlation is useless is to claim that there is no other activity performed by humans which is sufficiently similar to an IQ test, which is clearly not true.

  If you’re going to have feelings this strong about the subject, you should do some more reading on it. Your view that IQ isn’t some absolute measure of human value is correct, but you should understand how and why if you’re going to go in depth about it.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨ultra high iq⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Wpuld you like to join my new society of people who are two smart to show off their IQ? You get a cool badge you can show people

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨ultra high iq⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Don’t let you convince yourself of something just because you want to believe it’s true. IQ is not an objective measurement of intelligence, but it isn’t completely useless either.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Does anyone else find it suspicious that there wasn't any criticism on here about Stop Killing Games until after it hit 1.4M signatures?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  You know hes using a figure of speech right? Are you protesting the usage of narcissism as an unofficial negative descriptor?